The case for democracy* in RPG settings
- Thread starter Whizbang Dustyboots
- Start date
Thondor
I run Compose Dream Games RPG Marketplace
I just read through and then did a video on Aegean.
All the players are from the same Greek city-state (polis) and it is a democracy. They get to decide what type of Arkon is currently in charge. There's a downtime phase/subsystem that is a city events and building. The phase is largely player directed.
Players can stand for election to one of the five "offices" (this is a roll, a few things can go into it) and then they have more influence on that particular area.
There's a random polis level event, and both this and the other things that happen can tie into the subsequent main adventure phase.
It's a neat concept, and would serve as a fun core for a long(er) campaign.
Here's the video for the curious:
All the players are from the same Greek city-state (polis) and it is a democracy. They get to decide what type of Arkon is currently in charge. There's a downtime phase/subsystem that is a city events and building. The phase is largely player directed.
Players can stand for election to one of the five "offices" (this is a roll, a few things can go into it) and then they have more influence on that particular area.
There's a random polis level event, and both this and the other things that happen can tie into the subsequent main adventure phase.
It's a neat concept, and would serve as a fun core for a long(er) campaign.
Here's the video for the curious:
KYRON45
Hero
No no....this moment is just for you and I.
Autumnal
Bruce Baugh, Writer of Fortune
Thanks, @Whizbang Dustyboots , I loved reading that! I’ve been thinking similar thoughts for a while. Republics can be weird and full of opportunities and trouble. Venice has already been mentioned, and of course the Roman republic for another classic example. I’ve been noodging at a setting where Roman-style overthrows of monarchies happened everywhere several centuries before game time, and about the only people trying to bring them back are undead with ambitions.
I think the word "democracy" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in the OP. Democracy implies that power is somewhat widespread among the population – while universal suffrage has been fairly uncommon, things like "all landowners get the vote" and the like are generally recognized as (imperfect) democracies, and I don't think that's what they're going for. That's a bit too diffuse for political elements in a game, where PCs who want to influence politics would need to employ tools like propaganda rather than heroic deeds and/or favors.
What they're actually going for seems more like "factions": a manageable number of groups, often with a representative head, wielding formal or informal power mostly in their own right without being beholden to a central figure for that power. These factions generally come in two types, which we can call professional and political.
A professional faction is one that controls a particular pillar of society. This could be "the Church", "the Craftsmen", "the Army", "the Navy", "the Law", and so on. A political faction is one that's united by a common desire to control the state and move it in a particular direction. Sometimes this can be an idealistic goal ("We believe this to be the best way forward."), like many political parties claim to have, while others it's more of a tribal thing ("We want the house of Bourbon to be on top.").
Often, you have both types of factions, with political factions having various levels of influence among the professional factions. A good example to look at here for a large-scale state is the Realm in Exalted. The Realm is currently governed by 11 Great Houses that each have various levels of influence in assorted power centers: the Legions, the Immaculate Order, the various directional Navies, and so on. 11 houses is probably too much for an RPG (it gets hard to keep track of them unless they're the central focus of a campaign and everyone has a high level of buy-in), but it serves as an example of how the two levels of factions intersect.
What they're actually going for seems more like "factions": a manageable number of groups, often with a representative head, wielding formal or informal power mostly in their own right without being beholden to a central figure for that power. These factions generally come in two types, which we can call professional and political.
A professional faction is one that controls a particular pillar of society. This could be "the Church", "the Craftsmen", "the Army", "the Navy", "the Law", and so on. A political faction is one that's united by a common desire to control the state and move it in a particular direction. Sometimes this can be an idealistic goal ("We believe this to be the best way forward."), like many political parties claim to have, while others it's more of a tribal thing ("We want the house of Bourbon to be on top.").
Often, you have both types of factions, with political factions having various levels of influence among the professional factions. A good example to look at here for a large-scale state is the Realm in Exalted. The Realm is currently governed by 11 Great Houses that each have various levels of influence in assorted power centers: the Legions, the Immaculate Order, the various directional Navies, and so on. 11 houses is probably too much for an RPG (it gets hard to keep track of them unless they're the central focus of a campaign and everyone has a high level of buy-in), but it serves as an example of how the two levels of factions intersect.
el-remmen
Moderator Emeritus
My current setting and the one I am tying my “Vanity Frankenstein 5e” rule set to is a democracy. The two major factions are “traditionalists” who are wealthy descendants of former nobles who generations later use their wealth and influence (they have the best chance of being elected or influencing who gets elected) to undermine the republic and push the state towards an autocracy. And the “Loyalists” who reinforce the values of the Republic’s charter. There is also a dwarven heptarchy (rules by 7 thegns) that kind of exists separately within the boundaries of the republic.
And of course there are plenty of isolated communities who resist being assimilated into the charter.
And of course there are plenty of isolated communities who resist being assimilated into the charter.
aramis erak
Legend
Historically, almost all democracies eventually fall to autocracy and/or oligarchy... Very few fall to be replaced with enlightened anything...
... and more often than not, even democratic-minded revolutions usually result in a failed state.
Edgar Ironpelt
Adventurer
Almost anything can be made to work with the right sort of players in the appropriate sort of game. For a more-or-less standard D&D-type game, though, what's wanted is an aristocratic or oligarchic society where the PCs - at least at high level - get to be the aristocrats or oligarchs.
That means avoiding both absolute, divine-right monarchies (and their non-western/non-monotheistic equivalents) and mass democracy. Or at least subverting them if they are present. Maybe by making the PCs into "special agents" of one sort or another who don't have to abide by the normal rules. Or if the system is based on mass democracy, have it be a 19th century Small Government sort of democracy, rather than a 20th century Big Government type. (I've read claims that D&D games are often Westerns with medieval tech plus magic, rather than actual medieval or medievaloid societies.)
So multiple, often competing, centers of authority, each of which is relatively low in power. So lots of little kingdoms, principalities, city-states, etc. or if there are Great Big Kingdoms and Empires, then lots of internal factions and room for independent action.
That means avoiding both absolute, divine-right monarchies (and their non-western/non-monotheistic equivalents) and mass democracy. Or at least subverting them if they are present. Maybe by making the PCs into "special agents" of one sort or another who don't have to abide by the normal rules. Or if the system is based on mass democracy, have it be a 19th century Small Government sort of democracy, rather than a 20th century Big Government type. (I've read claims that D&D games are often Westerns with medieval tech plus magic, rather than actual medieval or medievaloid societies.)
So multiple, often competing, centers of authority, each of which is relatively low in power. So lots of little kingdoms, principalities, city-states, etc. or if there are Great Big Kingdoms and Empires, then lots of internal factions and room for independent action.
Retros_x
Adventurer
Our Phandelver campaign escalated a bit after the mayor died and the village voted for a new one. Players had tons of fun with that for multiple sessions, so yes - if player agency has direct impact on politics, it can be a lot of fun. "Democratic" principles can do that even on lower levels.
Similar Threads
